London Banter

London Banter (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/forum.php)
-   London Transport (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/london-transport/)
-   -   Class 376 deployment questions (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/london-transport/2455-class-376-deployment-questions.html)

S R November 27th 04 03:49 PM

Class 376 deployment questions
 
Two questions regarding the deployment of these new 5-car trains:

1) are there routes on which they will completely replace the Class 465 and
466s?

2) if so, for those routes where the platform length limits trains to eight
carriages, will all current 6- and 8-car trains be replaced by 5-car trains,
or can they operate 10-car trains where doors on the two rearmost carriages
won't open at all stations?

S R



Peter Masson November 27th 04 04:00 PM

Class 376 deployment questions
 

"S R" wrote in message
...
Two questions regarding the deployment of these new 5-car trains:

1) are there routes on which they will completely replace the Class 465

and
466s?

2) if so, for those routes where the platform length limits trains to

eight
carriages, will all current 6- and 8-car trains be replaced by 5-car

trains,
or can they operate 10-car trains where doors on the two rearmost

carriages
won't open at all stations?

AIUI they will operate on Charing Cross and Cannon Street services. All
platforms on these routes were extended to take 10-car trains in the 1950s,
and many were further extended to 12-car length in the abortive scheme of
the early 1990s. They will not normally operate on Victoria/Blackfriars
routes, where many suburban platforms can still only take 8-car trains.
There won't be enough 376s to displace Networkers completely from any route.

Peter



Nick Lawford November 27th 04 06:46 PM

Class 376 deployment questions
 
"Peter Masson" wrote in message


There won't be enough 376s to displace Networkers completely from any route.


There are more than enough to cover specific routes entirely.

36 units must be more than enough to cover a service such as Hayes or
Dartford via Greenwich (and excluding the obvious but silly answer of
Bromley North).

Surely both routes are entirely served from CS/CX so the short platforms
issue does not arise.

I can't see any reason why they'd diagram in such a way to be 376 only,
but it could be done in theory, which is why I assume the OP
asked the question.

--
Nick









--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

James Looker November 27th 04 10:22 PM

Class 376 deployment questions
 
Nick Lawford wrote:
"Peter Masson" wrote in message



There won't be enough 376s to displace Networkers completely from any route.



There are more than enough to cover specific routes entirely.

36 units must be more than enough to cover a service such as Hayes or
Dartford via Greenwich (and excluding the obvious but silly answer of
Bromley North).

Surely both routes are entirely served from CS/CX so the short platforms
issue does not arise.

I can't see any reason why they'd diagram in such a way to be 376 only,
but it could be done in theory, which is why I assume the OP
asked the question.

--
Nick









Bromley North has been using the new trains and they have also been down
to Orpington and Sevenoaks. The routes through Grove Park are definetly
getting all new Class 376 trains within the next year.

MIG November 28th 04 10:37 AM

Class 376 deployment questions
 
James Looker wrote in message ...
Nick Lawford wrote:
"Peter Masson" wrote in message



There won't be enough 376s to displace Networkers completely from any route.



There are more than enough to cover specific routes entirely.

36 units must be more than enough to cover a service such as Hayes or
Dartford via Greenwich (and excluding the obvious but silly answer of
Bromley North).

Surely both routes are entirely served from CS/CX so the short platforms
issue does not arise.

I can't see any reason why they'd diagram in such a way to be 376 only,
but it could be done in theory, which is why I assume the OP
asked the question.

--
Nick


Bromley North has been using the new trains and they have also been down
to Orpington and Sevenoaks. The routes through Grove Park are definetly
getting all new Class 376 trains within the next year.


No one seems to have news of a drastic change in the diagrams that
would keep units on specific routes. That's why they can't be kept on
journeys they are best suited to. The are already doing some
"semi-fasts" via Woolwich and Lewisham.

R.C. Payne November 29th 04 03:47 PM

Class 376 deployment questions
 
MIG wrote:
James Looker wrote in message ...

Nick Lawford wrote:

"Peter Masson" wrote in message




There won't be enough 376s to displace Networkers completely from any route.


There are more than enough to cover specific routes entirely.

36 units must be more than enough to cover a service such as Hayes or
Dartford via Greenwich (and excluding the obvious but silly answer of
Bromley North).

Surely both routes are entirely served from CS/CX so the short platforms
issue does not arise.

I can't see any reason why they'd diagram in such a way to be 376 only,
but it could be done in theory, which is why I assume the OP
asked the question.

--
Nick



Bromley North has been using the new trains and they have also been down
to Orpington and Sevenoaks. The routes through Grove Park are definetly
getting all new Class 376 trains within the next year.



No one seems to have news of a drastic change in the diagrams that
would keep units on specific routes. That's why they can't be kept on
journeys they are best suited to. The are already doing some
"semi-fasts" via Woolwich and Lewisham.


I seem to recall having heard talk that (somehow) these trains were to
be kept off longer distance trips such as beyond Dartford, and people
here (on both uk.railway and u.t.l) pointing out how dificult that would
be. Have TPTB finally given up the idea of keeping them off Gillingham
services and the like?

Robin


S R November 29th 04 07:43 PM

Class 376 deployment questions
 

I can't see any reason why they'd diagram in such a way to be 376 only,
but it could be done in theory, which is why I assume the OP
asked the question.


My reason for asking was concern that routes limited by platform length to
8-car trains would see all their peak-period 6- and 8-car trains replaced by
5-car trains.

S R



Chris Fribbins November 30th 04 06:23 AM

Class 376 deployment questions
 
R.C. Payne wrote:
MIG wrote:

James Looker wrote in message
...

Nick Lawford wrote:

"Peter Masson" wrote in message




There won't be enough 376s to displace Networkers completely from
any route.



There are more than enough to cover specific routes entirely.

36 units must be more than enough to cover a service such as Hayes or
Dartford via Greenwich (and excluding the obvious but silly answer of
Bromley North).

Surely both routes are entirely served from CS/CX so the short
platforms
issue does not arise.

I can't see any reason why they'd diagram in such a way to be 376 only,
but it could be done in theory, which is why I assume the OP
asked the question.

--
Nick



Bromley North has been using the new trains and they have also been
down to Orpington and Sevenoaks. The routes through Grove Park are
definetly getting all new Class 376 trains within the next year.




No one seems to have news of a drastic change in the diagrams that
would keep units on specific routes. That's why they can't be kept on
journeys they are best suited to. The are already doing some
"semi-fasts" via Woolwich and Lewisham.



I seem to recall having heard talk that (somehow) these trains were to
be kept off longer distance trips such as beyond Dartford, and people
here (on both uk.railway and u.t.l) pointing out how dificult that would
be. Have TPTB finally given up the idea of keeping them off Gillingham
services and the like?

Robin

They are diagrammed on the 17:46 from Cannon Street to Higham (Strood
when tunnel re-opens in January) every day at the moment - 2 x 5 cars.
The official line is that they will run to Gravesend in off-peak but may
be used on longer journeys to/from Gillingham in the peak (also
Orpington off-peak, Sevenoaks in Peak). In reality seats are likely to
become available at Dartford (Coastbound) or earlier if you walk through
the train (easier than most) and you will get a seat from longer out if
you are London bound - that is if you want one!.

Chris

MIG November 30th 04 07:28 AM

Class 376 deployment questions
 
"R.C. Payne" wrote in message ...
MIG wrote:
James Looker wrote in message ...

Nick Lawford wrote:

"Peter Masson" wrote in message




There won't be enough 376s to displace Networkers completely from any route.


There are more than enough to cover specific routes entirely.

36 units must be more than enough to cover a service such as Hayes or
Dartford via Greenwich (and excluding the obvious but silly answer of
Bromley North).

Surely both routes are entirely served from CS/CX so the short platforms
issue does not arise.

I can't see any reason why they'd diagram in such a way to be 376 only,
but it could be done in theory, which is why I assume the OP
asked the question.

--
Nick



Bromley North has been using the new trains and they have also been down
to Orpington and Sevenoaks. The routes through Grove Park are definetly
getting all new Class 376 trains within the next year.



No one seems to have news of a drastic change in the diagrams that
would keep units on specific routes. That's why they can't be kept on
journeys they are best suited to. The are already doing some
"semi-fasts" via Woolwich and Lewisham.


I seem to recall having heard talk that (somehow) these trains were to
be kept off longer distance trips such as beyond Dartford, and people
here (on both uk.railway and u.t.l) pointing out how dificult that would
be. Have TPTB finally given up the idea of keeping them off Gillingham
services and the like?

Robin


Maybe there will be a drastic change in the diagrams when they are all
running, but I've certainly seen one doing Higham (would be
Gillingham) to Charing Cross. I've seen them on the Hayes and
Orpington lines, but it's hard to tell where they are going because,
surprise surprise, the indicators are usually switched off.

MIG November 30th 04 07:37 AM

Class 376 deployment questions
 
"S R" wrote in message ...
I can't see any reason why they'd diagram in such a way to be 376 only,
but it could be done in theory, which is why I assume the OP
asked the question.


My reason for asking was concern that routes limited by platform length to
8-car trains would see all their peak-period 6- and 8-car trains replaced by
5-car trains.

S R


I wouldn't be at all surprised. History shows a reduction in length
when new stock is introduced.

I guess we can take it that the introduction of five-car units is a
confirmation that we will never see the twelve-car trains for which
all those platforms were extended.

Maybe there has been an improvement in availability, but only in the
last couple of years has the peak-hour train length finally started to
increase (to a maximum of ten), after the general reduction in length
when the "Networkers" were introduced.

It was galling to have to stand in shorter trains when they were
introduced, having gone through all that disruption to extend the
platforms for the "longer Networker trains".

Soon after, some twelve-car slam-door trains on Ramsgate/Margate
services to Cannon Street were replaced by eight-car 365s. Did the
365s ever run in longer formations than that? I can't remember seeing
one.

R.C. Payne November 30th 04 10:22 AM

Class 376 deployment questions
 
S R wrote:
I can't see any reason why they'd diagram in such a way to be 376 only,
but it could be done in theory, which is why I assume the OP
asked the question.



My reason for asking was concern that routes limited by platform length to
8-car trains would see all their peak-period 6- and 8-car trains replaced by
5-car trains.


Which stations/routes are restricted to 8 cars? I might have been
sensible to have designed the 376s with selective door opening to permit
10 car working to these stations.

What actually is the history of the 12 car networker thing? I recall
lots of platform lengthening happening at about the time the networkers
were coming in, but I wasn't really paying attention at the time? What
work was left undone that would have allowed 12 car trains, and what
were the originally intended routes for them?

Robin


Chris Fribbins November 30th 04 11:20 AM

Class 376 deployment questions
 
R.C. Payne wrote:
S R wrote:

I can't see any reason why they'd diagram in such a way to be 376 only,
but it could be done in theory, which is why I assume the OP
asked the question.




My reason for asking was concern that routes limited by platform
length to
8-car trains would see all their peak-period 6- and 8-car trains
replaced by
5-car trains.



Which stations/routes are restricted to 8 cars? I might have been
sensible to have designed the 376s with selective door opening to permit
10 car working to these stations.

What actually is the history of the 12 car networker thing? I recall
lots of platform lengthening happening at about the time the networkers
were coming in, but I wasn't really paying attention at the time? What
work was left undone that would have allowed 12 car trains, and what
were the originally intended routes for them?

Robin

I still have the leaflets for the Networker launch. There is talk of
power supply upgrades required (where have I heard that since), longer
platforms, signaling improvements (later followed up by the Dartford
resignal ling. Use of longer trains (up to 12 coach), high power mode,
regenerative braking etc.

Chris

MIG November 30th 04 03:29 PM

Class 376 deployment questions
 
"R.C. Payne" wrote in message ...
S R wrote:
I can't see any reason why they'd diagram in such a way to be 376 only,
but it could be done in theory, which is why I assume the OP
asked the question.



My reason for asking was concern that routes limited by platform length to
8-car trains would see all their peak-period 6- and 8-car trains replaced by
5-car trains.


Which stations/routes are restricted to 8 cars? I might have been
sensible to have designed the 376s with selective door opening to permit
10 car working to these stations.

What actually is the history of the 12 car networker thing? I recall
lots of platform lengthening happening at about the time the networkers
were coming in, but I wasn't really paying attention at the time? What
work was left undone that would have allowed 12 car trains, and what
were the originally intended routes for them?

Robin


I can't give a list of what work was left undone, but I remember a lot
about the period. The Networkers were originally all going to be
units of four. The platforms were long enough for ten-car EPBs, but
the Networkers were going to have to be shorter (eight-car) if the
platforms weren't extended to allow for twelve.

But then three incompatible things happened.

1) The extension of all (most?) of the relevant platforms took place,
requiring Charing Cross to be closed for three solid weeks at one
point, and resulting in the disappearance of platform 7 at London
Bridge.

2) The order was changed to include two-car 466s, which meant that
there could be ten-car trains anyway.

3) The Networker trains, for a long time, were a maximum of eight
cars, and for many years the average length was shorter than the EPBs
had been.

The main result of the extended platforms has been to give the various
operators a good laugh watching people chasing short trains to the far
end of the platform.

S R November 30th 04 07:48 PM

Class 376 deployment questions
 

Which stations/routes are restricted to 8 cars? I might have been
sensible to have designed the 376s with selective door opening to permit
10 car working to these stations.


Victoria/Blackfriars-Beckenham Jn/Orpington

S R



Aaron Borbora November 30th 04 08:11 PM

Class 376 deployment questions
 

"Chris Fribbins" wrote in message
...
R.C. Payne wrote:
MIG wrote:

James Looker wrote in message
...

Nick Lawford wrote:

"Peter Masson" wrote in message




There won't be enough 376s to displace Networkers completely from any
route.



There are more than enough to cover specific routes entirely.

36 units must be more than enough to cover a service such as Hayes or
Dartford via Greenwich (and excluding the obvious but silly answer of
Bromley North).

Surely both routes are entirely served from CS/CX so the short
platforms
issue does not arise.

I can't see any reason why they'd diagram in such a way to be 376
only,
but it could be done in theory, which is why I assume the OP
asked the question.

--
Nick



Bromley North has been using the new trains and they have also been
down to Orpington and Sevenoaks. The routes through Grove Park are
definetly getting all new Class 376 trains within the next year.



No one seems to have news of a drastic change in the diagrams that
would keep units on specific routes. That's why they can't be kept on
journeys they are best suited to. The are already doing some
"semi-fasts" via Woolwich and Lewisham.



I seem to recall having heard talk that (somehow) these trains were to be
kept off longer distance trips such as beyond Dartford, and people here
(on both uk.railway and u.t.l) pointing out how dificult that would be.
Have TPTB finally given up the idea of keeping them off Gillingham
services and the like?

Robin

They are diagrammed on the 17:46 from Cannon Street to Higham (Strood
when tunnel re-opens in January) every day at the moment - 2 x 5 cars. The
official line is that they will run to Gravesend in off-peak but may be
used on longer journeys to/from Gillingham in the peak (also Orpington
off-peak, Sevenoaks in Peak). In reality seats are likely to become
available at Dartford (Coastbound) or earlier if you walk through the
train (easier than most) and you will get a seat from longer out if you
are London bound - that is if you want one!.

Chris

I can't believe this - are they seriously planning to run to Gillingham on
stock with no toilets?
This is just absured, it really is.
Aaron




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Nick November 30th 04 10:01 PM

Class 376 deployment questions
 

"S R" wrote in message
...

I can't see any reason why they'd diagram in such a way to be 376 only,
but it could be done in theory, which is why I assume the OP
asked the question.


My reason for asking was concern that routes limited by platform length to
8-car trains would see all their peak-period 6- and 8-car trains replaced
by
5-car trains.

S R


Speaking of 5-car formations, I've noticed some nice new "5 car stop" signs
appearing near some of the platform monitors on these routes (surely they
could just use the "6 car stop" positions anyway? Seem incredibly efficient
to have started this already when there must be so many other tasks to do in
tidying up SET's scruffy stations)

Still no sign of toilets on my route (Sidcup line) which we were promised
*before* deployment of any 376 units. Having said that, some bizarre
looking 5-metre steel uprights have been embedded in the platform area of
Sidcup station on the Dartford-bound platform, either side of an existing
set of seats. This might be the beginning of a new structure that might be
toilets? Might be completely unrelated though...

Nick



Darryl Chamberlain November 30th 04 10:14 PM

Class 376 deployment questions
 
(MIG) wrote in message . com...

1) The extension of all (most?) of the relevant platforms took place,
requiring Charing Cross to be closed for three solid weeks at one
point, and resulting in the disappearance of platform 7 at London
Bridge.


Westcombe Park stayed a 10-car platform station - not entirely sure
why, but one end of the station was at one point deemed some kind of
nature reserve, the other is the Blackwall Tunnel approach road.

I seem to remember reading somewhere that the 12-car scheme was
abandoned because of falling passenger numbers. That could be rubbish,
though.

John Ray November 30th 04 11:09 PM

Class 376 deployment questions
 
Aaron Borbora wrote:

I can't believe this - are they seriously planning to run to Gillingham on
stock with no toilets?
This is just absured, it really is.



There's a precedent - they run from London Bridge to Tonbridge using
class 508s.

--
John Ray


Tim S November 30th 04 11:22 PM

Class 376 deployment questions
 
On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 00:09:10 +0000, John Ray wrote:

Aaron Borbora wrote:

I can't believe this - are they seriously planning to run to Gillingham
on stock with no toilets?
This is just absured, it really is.



There's a precedent - they run from London Bridge to Tonbridge using class
508s.


a 508 *is* a toilet! :/



Peter Masson December 1st 04 09:33 AM

Class 376 deployment questions
 

"R.C. Payne" wrote in message
...
S R wrote:
I can't see any reason why they'd diagram in such a way to be 376 only,
but it could be done in theory, which is why I assume the OP
asked the question.



My reason for asking was concern that routes limited by platform length

to
8-car trains would see all their peak-period 6- and 8-car trains

replaced by
5-car trains.


Which stations/routes are restricted to 8 cars? I might have been
sensible to have designed the 376s with selective door opening to permit
10 car working to these stations.

What actually is the history of the 12 car networker thing? I recall
lots of platform lengthening happening at about the time the networkers
were coming in, but I wasn't really paying attention at the time? What
work was left undone that would have allowed 12 car trains, and what
were the originally intended routes for them?

As others have mentioned, the suburban routes from Victoria and Blackfriars
are limited to 8 car trains, but there is no suggestion that 376s will be
diagrammed on these routes. This includes Victoria - Dartford, because of
short platfroms at Denmark Hill, Peckham Rye and Nunhead.

The abortive 12-car scheme included Charing Cross and Cannon Street to
Dartford (via all routes) and Orpington. I am not sure whether it also
included Dartford - Gravesend (and Gillingham?), and Orpington - Sevenoaks.
It did not include Bromley North (which had already become a self-contained
shuttle) or Lewisham - Hayes. AIUI it was abandoned because of a downturn in
London commuting in the early 1990s because of a recession, because the
works required at a few stations (Dartford, Lewisham, for example) was
proving seriously difficult and expensive, because the money wasn't there
for sufficient stock to run 12-car trains, and possibly because someone did
some calculations and found that a power upgrade (which hadn't been
budgetted) was needed.
Peter



Clive D. W. Feather December 1st 04 11:35 AM

Class 376 deployment questions
 
In article , Nick
writes
Speaking of 5-car formations, I've noticed some nice new "5 car stop" signs
appearing near some of the platform monitors on these routes (surely they
could just use the "6 car stop" positions anyway?


A driver of a 5-car train must stop at the "S" sign if there isn't a
specific "5". Just the same as the driver of an 8 car train can't stop
at the "4" sign if there isn't an "8". Some TOC managements will treat a
failure to do so as a SPAD.

If the right stopping place is the same a 6 car trains, then the 5 and 6
signs should be in the same place. If they aren't, there is a reason.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

Mrs Redboots December 1st 04 12:25 PM

Class 376 deployment questions
 
Aaron Borbora wrote to uk.transport.london on Tue, 30 Nov 2004:

I can't believe this - are they seriously planning to run to Gillingham on
stock with no toilets?
This is just absured, it really is.


When did you last travel on a train that had a working one? They are
invariably locked out of service, in my experience - and if they
*should* happen to be open, they are filthy and unusable. Cue
old-ladyish mutter of "In my young day.....".....
--
"Mrs Redboots"
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/
Website updated 28 November 2004



Rich Mallard December 1st 04 01:47 PM

Class 376 deployment questions
 

"Clive D. W. Feather" wrote in message
...
In article , Nick
writes
Speaking of 5-car formations, I've noticed some nice new "5 car stop"
signs
appearing near some of the platform monitors on these routes (surely they
could just use the "6 car stop" positions anyway?


A driver of a 5-car train must stop at the "S" sign if there isn't a
specific "5". Just the same as the driver of an 8 car train can't stop at
the "4" sign if there isn't an "8". Some TOC managements will treat a
failure to do so as a SPAD.


Well, yes, stopping an 8-car at a "4" sign is clearly not sensible, but
there have often been 3, 7 and 11-car formations on the mainline SET routes
and there aren't any "3", "7" or "11" signs as far as I can see, so
presumably the 7-car formations stop at "8" and 11-car stop at "12" etc?
Hence the logic that 5-car formations could just use "6"?

snipped




Clive D. W. Feather December 1st 04 06:29 PM

Class 376 deployment questions
 
In article , Mrs Redboots
writes
I can't believe this - are they seriously planning to run to Gillingham on
stock with no toilets?


When did you last travel on a train that had a working one?


About 90 minutes ago.

Admittedly this was on WA"not any more, but we can make 365s work"GN.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

John Clausen December 1st 04 07:40 PM

Class 376 deployment questions
 

"Clive D. W. Feather" wrote in message
...
In article , Nick
writes
Speaking of 5-car formations, I've noticed some nice new "5 car stop"
signs
appearing near some of the platform monitors on these routes (surely they
could just use the "6 car stop" positions anyway?


A driver of a 5-car train must stop at the "S" sign if there isn't a
specific "5". Just the same as the driver of an 8 car train can't stop at
the "4" sign if there isn't an "8". Some TOC managements will treat a
failure to do so as a SPAD.


This is somewhat over the top, many places don't have stop signs, e.g. the
whole of Cardiff Valley Lines. Stopping short of the sign would be worse
than going past because the back of the train could be off the platform.

John.



Alan J. Flavell December 1st 04 08:58 PM

Class 376 deployment questions
 
On Wed, 1 Dec 2004, John Clausen wrote:

This is somewhat over the top, many places don't have stop signs,
e.g. the whole of Cardiff Valley Lines.


Well, if it hasn't got a stop sign, surely no driver can be accused of
failing to stop at it? [1]

Stopping short of the sign would be worse than going past because
the back of the train could be off the platform.


What sign?

all the best

[1] I'm reminded of a colleague who received an official "opportunity
to pay a fixed penalty" for failing to stop at a red traffic light at
the junction of X road and Y street. He couldn't recall ever having
been there, but he went and looked, and found that there were no
traffic lights at that junction.

MIG December 2nd 04 03:04 PM

Class 376 deployment questions
 
Mrs Redboots wrote in message ...
Aaron Borbora wrote to uk.transport.london on Tue, 30 Nov 2004:

I can't believe this - are they seriously planning to run to Gillingham on
stock with no toilets?
This is just absured, it really is.


When did you last travel on a train that had a working one? They are
invariably locked out of service, in my experience - and if they
*should* happen to be open, they are filthy and unusable. Cue
old-ladyish mutter of "In my young day.....".....


Not on South Eastern Networkers for a long time, but to be fair, they
never had them on the EPBs that ran to Gillingham.

Now that they work less and less, the stink isn't so bad. You can
usually get a seat near the toilets because people assume that they
stink and stay away.

MIG December 2nd 04 03:10 PM

Class 376 deployment questions
 
"Peter Masson" wrote in message ...
"R.C. Payne" wrote in message
...
S R wrote:
I can't see any reason why they'd diagram in such a way to be 376 only,
but it could be done in theory, which is why I assume the OP
asked the question.


My reason for asking was concern that routes limited by platform length

to
8-car trains would see all their peak-period 6- and 8-car trains

replaced by
5-car trains.


Which stations/routes are restricted to 8 cars? I might have been
sensible to have designed the 376s with selective door opening to permit
10 car working to these stations.

What actually is the history of the 12 car networker thing? I recall
lots of platform lengthening happening at about the time the networkers
were coming in, but I wasn't really paying attention at the time? What
work was left undone that would have allowed 12 car trains, and what
were the originally intended routes for them?

As others have mentioned, the suburban routes from Victoria and Blackfriars
are limited to 8 car trains, but there is no suggestion that 376s will be
diagrammed on these routes. This includes Victoria - Dartford, because of
short platfroms at Denmark Hill, Peckham Rye and Nunhead.

The abortive 12-car scheme included Charing Cross and Cannon Street to
Dartford (via all routes) and Orpington. I am not sure whether it also
included Dartford - Gravesend (and Gillingham?), and Orpington - Sevenoaks.
It did not include Bromley North (which had already become a self-contained
shuttle) or Lewisham - Hayes. AIUI it was abandoned because of a downturn in
London commuting in the early 1990s because of a recession, because the
works required at a few stations (Dartford, Lewisham, for example) was
proving seriously difficult and expensive, because the money wasn't there
for sufficient stock to run 12-car trains, and possibly because someone did
some calculations and found that a power upgrade (which hadn't been
budgetted) was needed.
Peter


What was the problem with Lewisham? The platforms were extended and
the signals were moved as far as I can remember. Passengers at
platform 4 regularly have to chase the trains almost all the way to
Blackheath, despite the main entrance and all the information displays
being on the section of platform which is no longer used.

Peter Masson December 2nd 04 05:03 PM

Class 376 deployment questions
 

"MIG" wrote in message
om...

What was the problem with Lewisham? The platforms were extended and
the signals were moved as far as I can remember.


Your memory may well be better than mine. ISTR early on in the programme
that Lewisham was one of the 'difficult' stations, and I had sort of assumed
that it was one they never got round to. Did they extend all four platforms?
Peter



Nick Leverton December 2nd 04 10:39 PM

Class 376 deployment questions
 
In article ,
Aaron Borbora wrote:

I can't believe this - are they seriously planning to run to Gillingham on
stock with no toilets?
This is just absured, it really is.


Such as 2x 4EPB, for instance ...

Nick
--
http://www.leverton.org/ ... So express yourself

MIG December 3rd 04 12:11 AM

Class 376 deployment questions
 
"Peter Masson" wrote in message ...
"MIG" wrote in message
om...

What was the problem with Lewisham? The platforms were extended and
the signals were moved as far as I can remember.


Your memory may well be better than mine. ISTR early on in the programme
that Lewisham was one of the 'difficult' stations, and I had sort of assumed
that it was one they never got round to. Did they extend all four platforms?
Peter


I'm pretty sure they did, but maybe they didn't move all the signals
etc. Next time I'm there with my walking boots on ...

MIG December 4th 04 08:02 PM

Class 376 deployment questions
 
(MIG) wrote in message . com...
"Peter Masson" wrote in message ...
"MIG" wrote in message
om...

What was the problem with Lewisham? The platforms were extended and
the signals were moved as far as I can remember.


Your memory may well be better than mine. ISTR early on in the programme
that Lewisham was one of the 'difficult' stations, and I had sort of assumed
that it was one they never got round to. Did they extend all four platforms?
Peter


I'm pretty sure they did, but maybe they didn't move all the signals
etc. Next time I'm there with my walking boots on ...


Yes, all the signals are moved as well.

The entrances, the information displays and the station office are all
at the Central London end. The extensions were all at the other end.
Trains towards Central London on platforms 1 and 3 seem to stop at the
end of the platform, regardless of train length, which makes sense.
The situation is different with the platforms leading away from
London.

At platform 2, there are 8, 6, 5 and 4 stops at the same place, about
four coach lengths from the far end. There is a 10 stop about two
coach lengths from the end. So eight and ten car trains may hang back
to the end of the station where people are. I couldn't see a 12 stop,
and in any case the far end of the platform isn't used, but the signal
is beyond the end of the plaform.

At platform 4, there are 6, 5 and 4 stops about four coach lengths
from the far end and 8, 10 and 12 stops right at the far end. These
leaves the back end not used at all, and usually results in trains
whizzing past at least four coach lengths of the part of the platform
where people are most likely to be waiting, leaving potential
passengers to chase them if they are capable of doing so.

All these years on, people still don't expect the trains not to use
the part of the platform where the entrance and all the information
displays are.

Colin Rosenstiel December 5th 04 02:10 PM

Class 376 deployment questions
 
In article ,
(MIG) wrote:

"S R" wrote in message
...
I can't see any reason why they'd diagram in such a way to be 376
only, but it could be done in theory, which is why I assume the OP
asked the question.


My reason for asking was concern that routes limited by platform
length to 8-car trains would see all their peak-period 6- and 8-car
trains replaced by 5-car trains.


I wouldn't be at all surprised. History shows a reduction in length
when new stock is introduced.

I guess we can take it that the introduction of five-car units is a
confirmation that we will never see the twelve-car trains for which
all those platforms were extended.

Maybe there has been an improvement in availability, but only in the
last couple of years has the peak-hour train length finally started to
increase (to a maximum of ten), after the general reduction in length
when the "Networkers" were introduced.

It was galling to have to stand in shorter trains when they were
introduced, having gone through all that disruption to extend the
platforms for the "longer Networker trains".

Soon after, some twelve-car slam-door trains on Ramsgate/Margate
services to Cannon Street were replaced by eight-car 365s. Did the
365s ever run in longer formations than that? I can't remember seeing
one.


I've see 12-car 365 formations on King's Cross-Peterborough workings.

--
Colin Rosenstiel


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:13 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk